Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1




|Views: 2,070|Likes:
Published by heresnemo

More info:

Categories:Types, School Work
Published by: heresnemo on Feb 11, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF or read online from Scribd
See more
See less


ixIntroduction 11 Machiavelli
G. R. Berridge
72 Guicciardini
G. R. Berridge
333 Grotius
G. R. Berridge
504 Richelieu
G. R. Berridge
715 Wicquefort
 Maurice Keens-Soper 
886 CallieÁres
 Maurice Keens-Soper 
1067 Satow
T. G. Otte
1258 Nicolson
T. G. Otte
1519 Kissinger
T. G. Otte
Diplomacy is the term given to the official channels of communicationemployed by the members of a system of states.
In the modern worldsystem these are to be found chiefly in a network of diplomatsand consuls who enjoy the protection of special legal rules and arepermanently resident abroad, some at the seats of international organi-zations. This network first came into being in the Italian peninsula inthe second half of the fifteenth century and reached its full expressionin Europe in the two and a half centuries that followed the Congress of MuÈnster and OsnabruÈck (1644±8). From the end of the First World Waruntil well after the end of the Second, the diplomacy of this system wassubjected to unprecedented criticism: it was said to be the handmaidenof war, or imperialism ± or both. Nevertheless, it withstood its detractorsand, at the height of the Cold War, was strengthened by the successfulcodification of the customary international law governing its pro-cedures.
Diplomacy turns chiefly on regular and regularized negotiation,
andits advent was a moment of profound historical importance. For so longas power continues to be dispersed among a plurality of states, negotia-tion will remain essential to the difference between peace and war. It isonly negotiation, in other words, that can produce the advantagesobtainable from the cooperative pursuit of common interests; and it isonly this activity that can prevent violence from being employed tosettle remaining arguments over conflicting ones. When war breaks outnevertheless, it is also negotiation that remains indispensable if theworst excesses of fighting are to be limited and if, in addition, amutually tolerable peace is eventually to be achieved. In orchestratingand moderating the dialogue between states, diplomacy thus serves as abulwark against international chaos; in this way it may be understood as
a more fragile counterpart, operating within a system based upon states,to the domestic order or `political system' of the state itself.Although diplomacy thus conceived is the theme of this collection of essays, something further needs to be said about `diplomatic theory'. Aswith other forms of theorizing, including the political theory of thestate, diplomatic theory is reflective in character, permanently indebtedto historical reasoning, and unfailingly ethical in inspiration. The moralelement is perhaps nowhere better illustrated than by the question:must diplomats always keep their promises to foreign governments?However, even the claim of Martin Wight that diplomacy is `themaster-institution of international relations'
is an argument not solely± or even chiefly ± about its varying impact on everyday internationalevents, but about its value and the consequent wisdom of upholding it.Diplomatic theory appeared at the same time as diplomacy began toassume its distinctively modern form in the late fifteenth century,though it is not surprising that at this stage it was weak and stunted ingrowth. In the course of analysing many treatises on the ambassadorproduced in the period from the late fifteenth until the early sixteenthcentury, Behrens
observed repeated emphasis on the following lines of questioning: What is an ambassador? What class of person and mannerof entourage should be sent on different kinds of mission to princes of varying standing? Is a hierarchy of official classes of diplomat desirableand, if so, what form should it take? On what grounds are the privilegesand immunities of diplomats justified? For what purposes do embassiesexist? By what principles should an ambassador regulate his conduct; inparticular, must he always be honest?
Above all, were the newly emer-ging resident embassies a good thing or not?
Though the answers tothese questions were seldom extensively considered and often lackingcogency, we can at least see that the questions themselves were goodones. Most have remained points of departure for diplomatic theoryuntil the present time.In those days most of the writing on diplomacy was the work of eitherdiplomats such as Ermolao Barbaro, jurists like Alberico Gentili, or sometypified by Grotius who were both. As a result, and also in obedience tothe fashionable `mirror of princes' tradition, until the late seventeenthcentury discussion of diplomacy tended to revolve around `the perfectambassador' and his complex legal standing at a foreign court. In theaftermath of the Congress of MuÈnster and OsnabruÈck however, when itbecame clear that the rulers of Europe had a common interest in regu-lating their frequently bellicose `foreign' relations, diplomatic theoryacquired a more explicit
flavour. This occurred when attention
Diplomatic Theory from Machiavelli to Kissinger 

Activity (25)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Yong Afira liked this
astefanovich liked this
Ana Maria liked this
Oxony20 liked this
Paraskevi Triant liked this
Oxony20 liked this
Oxony20 liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->